Does WOTC have the right?

[Treebore]

Does WOTC have any right, or legal precedence, to demand that legally licensed and published products must be retroactively destroyed?

I can see how they can demand cease and desist, but to destroy legally produced goods?

Any precedence to this?

If not I would take it to court.

 

[blargney the second]

Man, what?

 

[Crothian]

Going to court against a cooperation is not cheap. I hope you are well funded.

 

[Morrus]

Nope. Fortunately they haven't made any such demand. That would be an odd thing for them to do.

It's possible they may invite people to voluntarily enter an agreement (let's call it a "license" relating to a new "game system"; "GSL" for short) whereby they give them something new in exchange for ceasing distribution of such products.

But nope, WotC aren't forcing anyone to do anything.

Regarding the d20 logo - that license was always revocable; it said so right in its own terms, which publishers (including myself) voluntarily agreed to. A six-month sell-off period is remarkably generous, given that the license only stipulates, I think, 30 days.

 

[Treebore]

Well, I have been reading what others have said, but my understanding is anything with the D20/WOTC logo's on it must be sold off or destroyed by the time the license is terminated.

So if that is false, then yeah, this is a moot question.

However suing a corporation isn't expensive if you know how to file a lawsuit. ITs expensive to keep up with all the shenanigans the expensive lawyers pull to make lawsuits go away without actually going to court.

 

[BryonD]

nevermind, subsequent posts changed the relevance

 

[SavageRobby]

Well, I have been reading what others have said, but my understanding is anything with the D20/WOTC logo's on it must be sold off or destroyed by the time the license is terminated.

So if that is false, then yeah, this is a moot question.

If you're talked about the d20 license, from what I read and understand, there is a sell off period after the license terminates (IIRC it terminates in June 2008 and there is a sell-off period through the end of 2008), and they'd given prior notice about when the license expires, and this all falls within the provisions of the license itself. I could easily be wrong on the specific details.

As much as I like to find things to vilify the good folks at WotC about, as near as I can determine this isn't one of them.

 

[Treebore]

Well, does the STL say that termination of the license means that those who use (and therefore agreed to the terms of the license) will then destroy all unsold inventory? All I read was that when the license terminated so to would all publication rights. I don't recall seeing anything about also agreeing to destroy all remaining inventory, but its been a long time since I read the STL license.

 

[lurkinglidda]

Does WOTC have any right, or legal precedence, to demand that legally licensed and published products must be retroactively destroyed?

Upon entering into agreement with WotC on the d20 STL, by providing a signed confirmation card, entities agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the license, including the destruction of product upon termination of the license. This is legally binding, so the answer to your question is yes, WotC does have the right.

This is clearly stated in section 6 of the d20 STL v 6.0.

For more information, please view the license here:

http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/d20stlv6.rtf

 

[SavageRobby]

Upon entering into agreement with WotC on the d20 STL, by providing a signed confirmation card, entities agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the license, including the destruction of product upon termination of the license. This is legally binding, so the answer to your question is yes, WotC does have the right.

This is clearly stated in section 6 of the d20 STL v 6.0.

For more information, please view the license here:

http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/d20stlv6.rtf

Heh. There is a typo in there. "In Wizards sold discretion...".